Reply from Elder Holland Mormon Apostle to my letter

user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:588d1de9afbf6e51af1a79c0e7f49a9c' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 27.

user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>By anointed one May 2012</p>\n<p>Jeffery Holland [Mormon Apostle] Response and my reply<br />\n( Original letter - <a href=\"http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/Letter-to-Elder-Holland-Book-of-Mormon\" title=\"http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/Letter-to-Elder-Holland-Book-of-Mormon\">http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/Letter-to-Elder-Holland-Book-of-Mormon</a> )<br />\nAn excerpt from Anointed One\'s response: \'You absolutely amazed me with your email. You are a highly educated, articulate and well read person with a PhD from Yale. Yet, you do not address one issue in my letter. Instead, you sent me a mindless rant.\'</p>\n<p>Elder Holland sent me an email in response to my letter but, being the bully and coward that he is, the following prohibition notice was appended to the email</p>\n<p>NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.</p>\n<p>This may, however, be a “corporate” notice and not intended by Elder Holland. If, so my apologies for calling him a coward and a bully. It is only his church that is a coward and bully.</p>\n<p>I shall, however, publish my response to him and permit him and his church to copy and forward it as often as they like provided it is copied in its entirety and is in no way misrepresented nor used to misrepresent me. In my response I will have to, necessarily, quote from his email but I will do my utmost to protect private information such as the references he makes to my wife and his wife (including stating her whereabouts at a certain time – shame on you Jeff).</p>\n<p>Dear Jeff,</p>\n<p>You absolutely amazed me with your email. You are a highly educated, articulate and well read person with a PhD from Yale. Yet, you do not address one issue in my letter. Instead, you sent me a mindless rant. I was caught off guard. No way could I have imagined such a response. I expected you to justify your claims (such as Joseph Smith gave his life because he was not willing to deny the Book of Mormon) and refute the facts I put to you as evidence the Book of Mormon was not true.</p>\n<p>I assumed you would honour your “sudden death” challenge that you have so often used. That it, the Book of Mormon, is either true or it is a fraud, there is no middle way. I would put it another way, it is either the word of God, as claimed by you, or it is a work of fiction put together by an author or authors in the nineteenth century. I believe my letter explains why I consider it to be the latter. Where is your refutation of such an opinion and justification for public statements you have made concerning its truthfulness? If you could not do this I expected a kindly brush off type of reply, not a rant full of logical fallacies, ad hominem attacks and insinuations.</p>\n<p>I tried to defend your reputation when people were calling you a “dodo” and a liar. No, he’s not like that, the Elder Holland I knew, loved and respected. Well, it seems you have proven me wrong in that respect. I recently watched your interview with Mr. Sweeney for a BBC programme entitled “The Mormon Candidate” and I could not believe your attempts at lying. Jeff, you are supposed to be an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. Why lie to a reporter? Oh, I forgot, that is perfectly acceptable since Gordon B. Hinckley did it with Larry King, Mike Wallace etc.<br />\nWhy not just answer my specific questions? I am sure, with your vast knowledge and experience, it would have taken less time than your mindless rant against me. You could have even handed it over to a BYU professor or another of your minions to draft a reply. You need only have taken the time to sign (even that could have been done by a signature machine or, in fact an email response could have been sent under your name without you even seeing it). That would have saved you time and the so called pain I have inflicted upon you. Get over it, If I have caused you pain by reminding you the church is not true, that is not my fault. The cause of your pain lies with you and the church.</p>\n<p>As an apostle where is your ‘Christlike’ love? You have opportunity of going after the ‘lost sheep’ yet you choose to criticise and say “I don’t care what you do”. How Christian of you. In your BBC interview you offered to sit down with a group of ex-mormons to discuss their issues. Yet, when someone wrote to you and offered for a group to come and meet with you at any time and venue convenient for yourself, you did not reply. If you had replied appropriately to my letter thousands of ex-mormons may have been reclaimed by the church. Instead, you have proven to them most conclusively that the church is not true and you must be aware of that or you would not be feeling the pain. Some have observed you as having a ‘meltdown’. I now understand why they should come to such an observation.</p>\n<p>Of course, another explanation could be you are not in ‘meltdown’ but this is a very clever ploy by you to get the truth out without actually saying it. It’s like a ‘hidden parable’ that only those with ears to hear can hear. Perhaps your response to me could be translated “Tom, you are absolutely right, the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction. However, I cannot say that because of sworn allegiance to my ‘Brethren’ and all that I will lose. I have never seen Christ yet I always thought an apostle would. My ranting, crying, pounding the podium, prevarication with journalists etc. is my way of getting the message out subliminally. Of course, it’s false but I cannot state that”.</p>\n<p>Now, to respond to your email. You asked me three specific questions and, although I have no obligation to reply because none of those questions have anything to do with claims I have made in public, I will respond. Unlike you, of whom I have asked specific questions pertaining to your published statements which you refuse to answer. Quotes from your email are in a different font to my reply or comments thereon.</p>\n<p>\"Tom, I love you but you absolutely break my heart. I have seldom met anyone during my years in England—unless it was your son Alan—in whom I saw greater potential. ......... You have a remarkable family. And that, of course, only adds to the immense pain I feel.\"<br />\nWhy do you feel pain and how have I caused that pain? I wrote respectfully to you and asked questions based on factual information. Why should that cause you pain?</p>\n<p>..................</p>\n<p>\" Oh, my! Tom, I weep over you and where you now find yourself. Don’t you realize that I have been reading stuff like you sent since I was 25 years old? But, I am sad to say, never in all those years with such disappointment.\"<br />\nFirstly some of the “stuff” I sent you was not available when you were 25 years old e.g. DNA studies confirming origins of American Indians, Book of Abraham papyri ( 1967 I believe) etc. Also, if you figured out the answers when you were 25 (you are now 70+) it should be easy for you to answer my questions, if there were any credible answers. So, why weep over me? If I am wrong in my facts or conclusions, show me in a loving way. Don’t refuse to address the issues and scold me for causing you pain. I suggest your pain comes from a lifetime of trying to be a valiant defender of that which indefensible.</p>\n<p>\"Tom, the Book of Mormon is true. It was delivered by and translated through the gift and power of God.\"<br />\nAll I asked was how such a book, being the word of God, could contain so many falsities which you refuse to answer.</p>\n<p>\"Alongside this statement you can post on the bulletin board my General Conference talk on the subject. Now, may I ask you just a few questions?\"<br />\nYes, I will reply even though you refuse to reply to my questions.</p>\n<p>\"(1) Have you ever had a spiritual experience in your entire life? \"<br />\nYou know perfectly well I have had thousands of so called spiritual experiences. In my opinion they are equal to any of those that Joseph Smith had.</p>\n<p>\"Are you having any in recent days, or weeks, or months?\"<br />\nEvery day of my life (perhaps even every waking hour) I experience joy in the wonders and beauty of this planet and those people I love. By the way, weeping during a public address is not a “spiritual experience” it is an emotional experience</p>\n<p>\"No discussion of the Book of Mormon or the Church or the Gospel of Jesus Christ has any ultimate meaning at all without that experience.\"<br />\nLogical fallacy Dr. Holland? As well as being untrue.</p>\n<p>\"(2) How does your family feel about your views?\"<br />\nWhat views? I have merely stated factual information from either church or school sources. They are not my views but those of so called prophets, seers and revelators and academic experts in specific disciplines. My family’s response is exactly the same as yours. They refuse to answer or discuss the issues and hurl personal insults against me. My ‘sweet angel’ of a wife, as you call her, has repeatedly said it would have been better for her if I had died while a faithful member of the church rather than live to ‘lose my faith’. My son Alan is the only one who eventually made known his ’views’ regarding some of my statements. He agreed there were errors in the Book of Mormon such as the doctrine that there was no death on this planet prior to 6,000 years ago; that Joseph Smith was wrong (i.e. not commanded by God) to have more than one wife; that the church is wrong to campaign against same sex marriage (this was during the California proposition 8 fiasco); however, he still believes Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus Christ in a grove of trees! Alan. As you know, is a stake president and has views (the first 3 of the 4 I mentioned) that are in direct opposition to the church. Of course, from the pulpit he will toe the party line.</p>\n<p>\"Are those views helping them?\"<br />\nMy views, if I were permitted to explain them, would help my family considerably and stop grandchildren being brainwashed into believing something which “you know ain’t so” in the words of Samuel Clemens / Mark Twain with whom you are familiar through your post graduate work. My views would help them be more compassionate of others, less judgemental and use their time to genuinely help others instead of promoting the aims of a church based on a fictional book. By contrast, by following and adopting the views of your church they ought to be (but fortunately are not) racist, homophobic, misogynistic, hate the Catholic Church (whore of the Earth per Book of Mormon), hate Protestant churches ((the Lord told Joseph Smith their creeds were an abomination to Him per JS History), anti Semitic (Mormons teach that the inhabitants of this earth and particularly the Jews are the only people who would have killed the Son of God). I could specify many other groups the church is intolerant toward despite your protestations to the contrary. Even in my own case your views are nasty and intolerant. According to church literature if someone like me who, as you know, has received the Second Anointing (made my exaltation basically unconditional) ,denies the Holy Ghost (interpreted as denying the church is true) they will be sons of perdition, cast out into outer darkness with Satan and his followers. Whereas, a man such as Adolf Hitler can inherit the Telestial Kingdom, still a kingdom of glory. So a man who kills 6 million Jews and countless others gets a better reward in the next life than I do according to Mormon theology (if there is such a thing). Does that sound like a just, loving God to you? No wonder there is shunning in the Mormon Church.</p>\n<p>\"Are people happier, prospering more, doing better following your lead?\"<br />\nYes, those that do are much happier and grateful to me for whatever small measure of help I have been to them. If you are referring to my family, however, well I have already told you that they have refused to take my lead in trying to establish what is true. Truth obviously means nothing to a true, devout Mormon!</p>\n<p>\"(3) Who are you trying to convince? Surely not me. Is it yourself or others?\"<br />\nI am not trying to convince anyone. I merely wrote to you outlining specific information which appeared to contradict your claim/declaration that the Book of Mormon is true. You have chosen not to answer any of those evidences and resort to a personal attack on me. Who are you trying to convince? It would be easy to convince me if you had credible answers, but you don’t. Are you content with convincing gullible church members who dote on your every word? Or, are you trying to convince yourself Jeff? Methinks this may be the case and would certainly explain your outbursts.</p>\n<p>\"You can do what you want about the Church, so do it. Stay. Leave. Hide. Run. Burn the Book of Mormon. Bury your temple covenants. Do anything you want. As the very book you reject says—truthfully—“you are free to act, and not be acted upon.”</p>\n<p>\"Tom, my heart is broken as I write this. I wish I hadn’t begun.\"<br />\nWhy is your heart broken? If it is out of concern for me why not lovingly and kindly correct my misconceptions if there are any? If it is because I have challenged your beliefs, you need to examine them. If they are based on truth you will be able to explain that to me as I am not a “dodo”. Why do you wish you hadn’t begun? Do I not deserve a reply? Of course, you haven’t even replied to the issues in my letter merely attacked me and ranted.</p>\n<p>\"I was raised without the Gospel in my youth and now I have it, so I am manifestly the wrong man to talk to about whether to go or whether to stay, whether the Book of Mormon is true or whether it isn\'t.\"<br />\nBut you are wrong. You are exactly the right man for this task. You are the one who has spoken on television, written books and articles and declared solemnly to the world that you KNOW the Book of Mormon is true. Also, from an academic point of view did you not gain a master’s degree for a dissertation on changes to the Book of Mormon? Weren’t your Yale master’s and doctorate degrees on American Studies? Are you not, as an Apostle, a special witness of Jesus Christ? You are the very man to give me credible answers. You must know the truth so why don’t you share it instead of resorting to emotion filled drivel?</p>\n<p>I say to you, Jeff, put up or shut up. Answer the considerable and overwhelming evidence that the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction or, if you can’t, stop trying to convince people it is true.</p>\n<p>\"The Book of Mormon changed my life more dramatically that any book could change any young man of whom I know—before or since— This does not make it true.\"<br />\nMillions of young men have had their lives dramatically changed by reading the Qur’an, the writings of Confucius, of Marcus Aurelius, of Plato, Aristotle, “Harry Potter”, the writings of Karl Marx, the writings of Mao Zedong, also translated as Mao Tse-tung and thousands of other books.<br />\nI know a couple of Christian evangelists who were both alcoholics and had their lives transformed by the Bible. They now spend all their time spreading their Christian beliefs. They have been told by the Holy Ghost the Book of Mormon is not from God and Mormons are not Christian. They could claim the truthfulness of their beliefs by your same argument, a book changed their lives that no other book can (including the Book of Mormon).</p>\n<p>\"it was first and foremost the Book of Mormon that taught me that Jesus is the Christ and filled my soul with lightning.\" Again, I ask you how can a book so full of falsities teach you that? You should have addressed my issues but, obviously, you cannot I am also aware of very many people who claim their “soul has been filled with lightening” or similar experiences and they have never read the Book of Mormon or have discarded it as false.</p>\n<p>Consider this, by your own assertions if the Book of Mormon is not true then the Church is not true. However, if the Book of Mormon is true, it does not follow that your church is true. There is the Community of Christ and 50 or more “Mormon” churches who claim the divinity of the Book of Mormon and that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. In fact, those others appear to follow more closely the teachings of the Book of Mormon and those of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and John Taylor. So which would be the true Mormon Church if the Book of Mormon were shown to be true? Those who say Joseph Smith went astray in his polygamy (The Community of Christ) or those who maintain Wilford Woodruff went astray in trying to stop polygamy (the FLDS etc.). Indeed, it would appear that Warren Jeffs is more of a prophet like Joseph Smith than Thomas S. Monson is.</p>\n<p>\"So do what you want, Tom, but don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses. The discussion about the power and promise of the Book of Mormon went light years beyond that a long time ago.\"<br />\nAgain you amaze me with such a statement. When and how precisely did this go “light years beyond science and history”. Jeff, you are either deliberately holding back information vital for mankind to understand the true nature of this planet and the universe or you are blowing smoke in the air. Which is it? Do you have knowledge our scientists would die for or are you mad?</p>\n<p>\"I love you and pray God you will be open to some spiritual indication of what is at stake here.\"<br />\nI see no evidence in your email nor in your works that you love me. You have refused to help and tried to blame me for some mysterious pain you feel, and you deride me. Which god will you pray to? The one depicted in a facsimile in the Book of Abraham who Joseph Smith said was God sitting on His throne. The figure has an erect penis which is rather a disturbing image of someone you pray to. It is, of course, quite normal if you understand the truth about the image, that it is a fictitious Egyptian fertility god. Don’t bother Jeff, I desire no supplication to such a being.</p>\n<p>\"I do love you and I will pray through this very night for you, more so than I will for the man who has cancer whom I now leave to bless. Yours is the more serious circumstance.\"<br />\nHow offensive! You are saying I am in a worse condition than a man dying of cancer. Have you gone completely mad? How can you say, let alone think, such a thing? I am so sorry for that man, for anyone suffering a terminal illness, particularly a painful one. I have witnessed many friends and family going through such agony. How cruel and offensive of you to say such a thing!. I am in remarkably good health and associate with friends who love me. I consider myself very blessed or fortunate and would hate to have any illness let alone a terminal one which, I understand, could happen to any of us. How awful of you, I cannot believe you capable of such a thought. You certainly are not the man I considered you to be and, in no way, do you demonstrate the compassion you profess that Jesus Christ taught.</p>\n<p>\"With immense sorrow but unfailing love,</p>\n<p>Jeff\"</p>\n<p>Your sorrow is self inflicted. I have done nothing except tell the truth. That should not cause you sorrow. The truth should not be your enemy. As for your unfailing love – where is it? You have failed to give me a response, to justify your extraordinary claims and have tried to belittle me with your ravings. How is that ‘unfailing love’?</p>\n<p>Jeff, please do not reply to this email unless you have anything of true substance to say. You will be wasting time for both of us. As i said earlier, either put up or shut up. I would like you to be man enough to substantiate that which you claim to be true or stop being a part of the brainwashing of innocent children such as my grandchildren.</p>\n<p>Sorry, but unless you are man enough to do this I have lost all respect for you. If I can ever help you to seek truth and understanding I am willing to take whatever time you require,</p>\n<p>I mean this in all sincerity,<br />\nTom</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Brother Of Jerry<br />\nBob McCue sent a similar letter to Holland roughly 10 years ago, and got a very similar reply.<br />\nHe sent back a rely to the reply. It was more gentle than AO\'s reply, but not much, and, being Bob, it was considerably longer (23 pages iirc). He did chide Holland for not addressing ANY of the issues he brought up in his first communication.</p>\n<p>Holland did not respond to the second letter. I doubt he will respond to AO\'s second email either. He already had the guilt cranked up to \"11\", so he has nothing more to fire back.</p>\n<hr />\nLethbridge Reprobate<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nWow!\n<hr />\n<p>Makurosu<br />\n\"don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses\"<br />\nYes, please. Keep yourself free of embarrassment by accepting the mopologist explanation of tapirs and wooden clubs with bits of obsidian embedded in them.</p>\n<p>Your response is excellent. You called him on the carpet, didn\'t allow him to bully or guilt you, and held him to his claimed apostolic duty. His email (or the parts of it that you quoted) was shameful.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Surrender Dorothy<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nWhat a manipulative S.O.B. he is! Obviously he didn\'t learn his lesson after the interview with the BBC reporter about his outbursts making him look embarrassingly ignorant, immature, and dishonest.</p>\n<p>I\'m so sorry your family does not value your courage and integrity, but many of us do. You are my hero today.</p>\n<hr />\nhelemon<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nWow! That it so condescending and emotionally manipulative. He knows they have nothing but guilt and emotion. Nice job standing up to him!\n<hr />\nlillium<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nThat was no surprise, just based on the BBC interview I saw. He dodged, lied, and generally seemed to be irritated and took offense at any question that might put TSCC in a bad light. And he did the emotional manipulation thing, pretending like the reporter was insinuating that he was dumb. Exactly what he did in his letter to you. Soooooo predictable. And immature.\n<hr />\n<p>tiptoes<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\ndodo<br />\ndodo<br />\ndodo<br />\ndodo</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Mia<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nMr. Hollands response says more about the church than I have ever heard any prophet or apostle admit. IMO, that was a confession to the untruthfulness of the mormon church. He validated everything i\'ve studied and researched. It\'s the only time i\'ve ever felt validated by the likes of them.</p>\n<hr />\nBeenThereDunnThatExMo<br />\nHey Jeff...I Come From A Family That Has Been Generationally Traumatized With Familial Relationships Shredded &amp; Torn Asunder By Mormonism &amp; By Authoritarian Liars Such As U...<br />\nYou lied on the BBC Documentary just as you lied on the pulpit at Gen-Conference recently and upon numerous previous occasions.\n<p>I can only hope that there is a \"Hell\" as there you will find yourself and the rest of your little \"Boys Club\" ilk sitting around your conference table figuring out ways to scam the rest of the S.O.B\'s that you find yourselves surrounded by.</p>\n<p>Does your worn out integrity even notify you anymore when you begin to lie...or have you so abused it that you honestly can\'t even tell which parts of your life are authentic and which parts are fantasy???</p>\n<p>You bastards have absolutley no idea of the damage, heartbreak and havoc you wreak daily in the lives of those gullible enough to look up to the likes of you as some sort of \"authority figure\".</p>\n<p>Your Mormonism is the cruelest hoax ever perpetrated upon gullible people.</p>\n<p>Or so it seems to me...</p>\n<p>BeenThereDunnThatExMo</p>\n<hr />\nspaghetti oh<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nVery interesting read, Tom/anointed one.\n<p>Loved your replies to his non-replies. Brilliant.</p>\n<hr />\nLOL<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nMr Holland,<br />\nI am so grateful to be out of your clutches!\n<hr />\n<p>DNA<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nHumans are great at partitioning their minds. He probably really thinks that he sent you a loving response that showed concern.</p>\n<p>The side of people that does all the work that keeps all the plates spinning, makes whatever it takes to keep them spinning seem completely reasonable.</p>\n<p>Was he actually a coward? Of course. Did he consciously think that is what he wrote? I doubt it.</p>\n<p>Many will disagree with me. I’m surprised often here how many former TBM’s totally forget what it was like to inhabit the mind of a TBM.</p>\n<p>This much I could pretty much guarantee. If any reasonable explanation existed at all that could answer questions such as yours, that only those in the highest positions have access to, he would have brought it out to help sway you.</p>\n<p>His response should go a long way in showing that even the guys at the top have nothing at all that would convenience a thinking person that there is any merit to the church’s claims. If it existed, he would have used it in your case. It simply doesn’t exist.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>davesnothere<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nWhen they’re left with no real response of value the powers-that-be fall back on their tried and true tools…fear and guilt….the trusty left and right hand of manipulation.</p>\n<p>Gutsy and brave exchange there Anointed-One. Very clear who the man with real integrity is! Bravo, my friend.</p>\n<hr />\nGreyfort<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nIt\'s amazing how much my view of the members of the Church Presidency have changed since I was a member. We were almost in awe of them. I guess they like the adoration. That\'s probably what they\'re working so hard to keep a hold of. They probably like the hero-worship they receive.\n<p>non-legal beagle anon for this<br />\nI\'m not convinced that you\'re legally prohibited from publishing the contents of Holland\'s letter to you.<br />\nHis response is now your personal property because Holland addressed it to you and sent it to you. It has now been received by you at your address to which Holland mailed it. By sending you his response letter to the letter that you first sent to him, I think Holland has essentially transferred its possession to you.</p>\n<p>I think the Mormon cult is simply trying to intimidate you by attaching veiled \"legaleeze\" warnings to Holland\'s reply letter. I think Holland sent his response to you at his own risk. I wouldn\'t be bullied by him and the religious cult for which he works.</p>\n<p>You might want to get some expert advice on this but I think you\'ve got every legal right to reprint Holland\'s letter which he personally addressed and sent to you (i.e., knowingly transferred to your possession). It\'s yours. He gave it to you. I would therefore regard it as a gift to you from Holland that you can now do with as you see fit.</p>\n<hr />\nknowitsfalse<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\n\"My son Alan is the only one who eventually made known his ’views’ regarding some of my statements. ...that Joseph Smith was wrong (i.e. not commanded by God) to have more than one wife....\"\n<p>So what your Son has just admitted (although he\'ll bury the thought and not admit it) is that the mormon church was founded by an adulterer and pedophile. That\'s what he\'s saying when he admits polygamy/polyandry wasn\'t of God. Worse, JS and many prophets to follow led the members of the church astray and into sin for multiple generations until the church was forced to give up polygamy. Does he see that that\'s what he\'s saying when he admits polygamy wasn\'t of God?</p>\n<p>I also love that you mention the BoA facsimile with the mormon god on his throne with a massive erection. Talk about one little thing showing the insanity of the BoA.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>PapaKen<br />\nThe Witness will answer the question!<br />\nJudge PapaKen: \"Inasmuch as this witness refuses to answer the questions, he is therefore held in contempt. I sentence him to think about the questions &amp; return to the court with his answers. If he never does, he will be held in isolation from the truth for the rest of his mortal life.</p>\n<p>\"PapaKen Court is dismissed!\" (gavel)</p>\n<hr />\nLost Mystic<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nAnointed One-\n<p>You are fantastic!</p>\n<p>I have never read/heard/seen anyone rip an \"apostle\" a new one and hand their ass back to them!</p>\n<p>Well done.</p>\n<p>I\'ll bet he loses sleep over it...</p>\n<hr />\nanointed one<br />\nThank you all for such kind and supportive responses......<br />\n.....Jeff Holland has no idea of the real pain we suffer when we find out our life\'s work has been for nought. When we realise we have been deceived and been an (unknowing) party to the deception of others.\n<p>How grateful I am for the support of this board. Jeff Holland may say he loves me but he shows the opposite. The irony is, this board, made up of exmos who may be Christian, Buddhist, New Age, Agnostic, Atheist etc. show me more love than a so called \'Apostle\'.</p>\n<hr />\nBrian M<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nJeff Holland\'s tone of feeling pain and avoidance of answering questions directly are identical to a response I received in email from the man who was a mission president while I was in Denmark (I have an aversion to calling him \"my mission president\" or the time I was in Denmark as \"my mission\") He was a president at the UK MTC, when I received a reply from him.\n<p>It seems that general authorities have completely put all logical issues as extremely low priority for addressing and have been selected for the ability to do so. Because their sense of morality was awakened and developed through the metaphors of the Book of Mormon and while involved in the church organization they assume that all morality anywhere has its roots in these two things and that individual\'s and societies\' well being are dependent on accepting them.</p>\n<p>They are making an error of determining the cause for their attachment to their strong beliefs. Generally during teenage years to adulthood humans develop a model of morality through the metaphors of their environment and experience. By the time one is 25 these habits of thoughts are strong and require significant environment changes for them to be questionable.</p>\n<p>It\'s interesting that Holland mentions specifically that since age 25 he has been able to ignore or disarm the logical problems of the church\'s claims. That may have been the time he decided to indefinitely value the church\'s intuitions over his own research and has followed that path ever since making them extremely strong ruts in his mental habits.</p>\n<p>General authorities\' mindsets seem to be mostly a product of their environment. Maybe the best way we ex-mos can help them to broaden is to have more polite, but open conversations with them like anointed one did.</p>\n<p>I hope the group ex-mo conversation with Holland goes through.</p>\n<p>Thanks for sharing anointed one. It confirmed to me that general authority morality and culture is largely a product of their environment that they were selected to enter for their personalities\' need for authority and extreme social order.</p>\n<hr />\npeter<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nFantastic post. Loved it. By the way, the legal rambling at the beginning holds no merit - you are free to do whatever you want with your email. It\'s nothing more than canned legalese that, in many cases (including the company I work for), is automatically added to the end of an email. The \"unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution\" doesn\'t apply, as you are fully authorized to do whatever you want with your own email.\n<p>Please post his full response and don\'t allow the legalese to scare you!</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Dances with Cureloms<br />\nUnless he signed an NDA he doesn\'t have to shut up about it.<br />\nI\'m speaking as a man and not as a profit here.</p>\n<hr />\nGreyfort<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nYeah, my company has something like that at the bottom of our e-mails too. And most e-mails I receive from other companies also have it.\n<hr />\n<p>xyz<br />\nSo.<br />\nDeputy Dawg Holland really is just a pathetic, jowly old fraud, pretending for the sake of his monthly cult salary that you, me, and everyone but him is deluded and foolish ...how sad, yet how predictable. He has only made himself look spectacularly ridiculous with his sanctimonious expressions of \"sorrow\" over the conditions of you and your family.</p>\n<p>I\'m sorry for you, anointed one, that you had to discover the shallowness and duplicity of someone you respected in such an unhappy fashion.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>non-legal beagle anon for this<br />\nSounds like a pre-emptive effort at muzzling the Mormon cult\'s critics. Talk about overplaying their hand.<br />\nHolland took the bait by replying in a letter exchange. What was he possibly thinking? Does he actually believe that what he writes to someone in personal correspondence must legally be kept under wraps by the recipient even if the receiver hasn\'t legally agreed to any such thing? Trying to keep it mum from the Mormon Church\'s end has the looks of a total non-starter to me. What a bunch of clunks. Typical of Control Freak Central.</p>\n<hr />\n<hr />\n<p>safado53<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nFirst off, thanks for posting this annointed one...it just confirms what we all know about the leadership. He addressed nothing, and tried to put it all on you as if it were your fault....what a cowardly ass. Holland also wrote \"So do what you want, Tom, but don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses. The discussion about the power and promise of the Book of Mormon went light years beyond that a long time ago\".....what the hell is he talking about? When did the discussion advance beyond this? These questions were never answered by the leadership and FAIR\'s attempts are weak at best, and there not even endorsed by the church, so again, when did we advance beyond the questions that you refuse to answer Jeff? The dishonesty and evasion in regard to the issues is sickening. It is so sad to see the men who are \"prophets, seers, and revelators\" provide nothing of substance to the world.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>seeking peace<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nThere is a reprehensible video going viral on the internet of a Baptist preacher suggesting that all gay people should be rounded up and put in a concentration camp. When I read Holland\'s calloused disregard for those who are truly seeking and trying with every fiber of their being to keep their families intact and protect their children from the cult, I see that the two are cut from the same narcissistic cloth. Holland, Mr. Baptist Preacher Man, and countless corrupt Popes all acting in the \"Name of Christ,\" history continues to repeat itself over and over! Thank you for your courage Anointed One--at least the truth has set you free!</p>\n<hr />\nZip<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nHolland keeps going back to the idea of having spiritual feelings as confirmation of the truth. It is a matter of depending on feelings -- or depending on FACTS.\n<p>This is from another post today on the same subject:</p>\n<p>_____________________________________________________________</p>\n<p>Christ himself (whom the Mormons claim to follow) warned against trusting those \"feelings\" you mention. Nevertheless, Mormons reverse the very process that Christ sternly states.</p>\n<p>According to Mormonism \"Feelings are more reliable then facts\". That\'s what we learn in the LDS church from our earliest years -- BUT -- it\'s exactly the OPPOSITE of what Christ himself taught in Matthew (and, interestingly, in the same verses in The Book of Mormon itself)!</p>\n<p>The great issues is whether Joseph Smith was a TRUE prophet -- or a FALSE prophet.</p>\n<p>Christ said that False Prophets would come and he then gave clear instruction regarding their discernment: He said that False Prophets will have all the appearances of lambs, but underneath they will be wolves.</p>\n<p>He then said to judge them ONLY by their FRUITS. He gave no other advise.</p>\n<p>In other words: DON\'T trust appearances and DON\'T trust the lamb-like feelings you get inside (the so-called \"burning in the bosom\")!</p>\n<p>Con men never look like con men; If they did they\'d be out of business overnight. A con man is someone you will naturally love like a brother. That\'s exactly how they get away with everything they do. Expect to be emotionally confused.</p>\n<p>When it comes to these fully lovable \"Prophets\" forget your feelings! Instead, use your God-given intellect and ANALYZE WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO!</p>\n<p>That is the ONLY advice Christ ever gave on the subject of False Prophets. If He had better advice he would have given that advice instead.</p>\n<p>According to Christ\'s own (and only) instruction, When it comes to False Prophets, trust your mind not your heart! The very fact that Mormonism gives the exact opposite instruction should settle the matter. By their \"fruits\" the church leadership expose themselves. Their instructions contradict the very Christ they claim to follow.</p>\n<p>As for Joseph Smith\'s ACTIONS (and those of many others), they were clearly reprehensible.</p>\n<p>Even if you don\'t believe in Christ, the point is that Mormons DO -- and by their OWN spiritual foundation they fail.</p>\n<p>When it comes to discerning True Prophets from False prophets Christ gave only one instruction: Never trust FEELINGS -- only trust FACTS!</p>\n<p>The great issue is What they actually end up DOING!</p>\n<hr />\n<p>3X<br />\nRe: \"don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses\"<br />\nMr. Holland\'s Opus: an astonishing display of unctuous, narcissistic baloney.</p>\n<hr />\nmyselfagain<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nYou were very open to share his response with us. I am in awe of your intelligent answers and retorts to Mr. Holland\'s pompous, sanctimonious letter to you. \'HIS\' heart is broken? What about all the poor souls that his church has hurt, families in crisis, people who feel lower than the lowest; ones whose lives have been changed for the worse by that church? It\'s HIS salvation he needs to be worried about- not yours or anyone else\'s.\n<hr />\n<p>anonfornow<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nI second (or third, fourth, fifth!) thanks and admiration for your bravery and integrity, AO! May all of your family come around to the truth you share so they can get on with their lives with peace and happiness. Your words are deeply appreciated and I send you my best wishes and thoughts. Thank you again, sir, you inspire more than those sad old men in SLC could ever dream to do.</p>\n<hr />\nfallible<br />\nVery well said. Thank you for sharing this exchange.&nbsp;\n<hr />\n<p>DebbiePA<br />\nRe: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter<br />\nBoo hoo for his broken heart. I say let\'s send him some of the hundreds of stories from RfM where spouses were abandoned, people lost their jobs, children disowned their parents, young gay men took their own lives, and parents wept because their child was lured by a sweetheart into a church that banned them from attending that child\'s wedding. And that\'s just the tip of the iceberg...all because of the oh so \"family centered\" LDS church.</p>\n<p>MY heart breaks for those people, not for this fake apostle who has no clue that true sorrow is being heaped upon countless poor souls whose only fault is not believing the Mormon church is true.</p>\n<hr />\nMia<br />\nRe: Sounds like a pre-emptive effort at muzzling the Mormon cult\'s critics. Talk about overplaying their hand.<br />\nThey are used to compliance and adoration. They are used to say ing \"jump\" and people asking how high.\n<p>They are not acquainted with opposition. They think they have everyone convinced they are a son of perdition if they oppose of even question these men.</p>\n<p>They don\'t have a clue how to answer sincere questions. That\'s why they made people stop asking them.</p>\n<p>\"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org\"</p>\n', created = 1481339049, expire = 1481425449, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:588d1de9afbf6e51af1a79c0e7f49a9c' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 112.

Jeffery Holland [Mormon Apostle] Response and my reply
( Original letter - http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/Letter-to-Elder-Holland-Book-of-Mormon )
An excerpt from Anointed One's response: 'You absolutely amazed me with your email. You are a highly educated, articulate and well read person with a PhD from Yale. Yet, you do not address one issue in my letter. Instead, you sent me a mindless rant.'

Elder Holland sent me an email in response to my letter but, being the bully and coward that he is, the following prohibition notice was appended to the email

NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

This may, however, be a “corporate” notice and not intended by Elder Holland. If, so my apologies for calling him a coward and a bully. It is only his church that is a coward and bully.

I shall, however, publish my response to him and permit him and his church to copy and forward it as often as they like provided it is copied in its entirety and is in no way misrepresented nor used to misrepresent me. In my response I will have to, necessarily, quote from his email but I will do my utmost to protect private information such as the references he makes to my wife and his wife (including stating her whereabouts at a certain time – shame on you Jeff).

Dear Jeff,

You absolutely amazed me with your email. You are a highly educated, articulate and well read person with a PhD from Yale. Yet, you do not address one issue in my letter. Instead, you sent me a mindless rant. I was caught off guard. No way could I have imagined such a response. I expected you to justify your claims (such as Joseph Smith gave his life because he was not willing to deny the Book of Mormon) and refute the facts I put to you as evidence the Book of Mormon was not true.

I assumed you would honour your “sudden death” challenge that you have so often used. That it, the Book of Mormon, is either true or it is a fraud, there is no middle way. I would put it another way, it is either the word of God, as claimed by you, or it is a work of fiction put together by an author or authors in the nineteenth century. I believe my letter explains why I consider it to be the latter. Where is your refutation of such an opinion and justification for public statements you have made concerning its truthfulness? If you could not do this I expected a kindly brush off type of reply, not a rant full of logical fallacies, ad hominem attacks and insinuations.

I tried to defend your reputation when people were calling you a “dodo” and a liar. No, he’s not like that, the Elder Holland I knew, loved and respected. Well, it seems you have proven me wrong in that respect. I recently watched your interview with Mr. Sweeney for a BBC programme entitled “The Mormon Candidate” and I could not believe your attempts at lying. Jeff, you are supposed to be an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. Why lie to a reporter? Oh, I forgot, that is perfectly acceptable since Gordon B. Hinckley did it with Larry King, Mike Wallace etc.
Why not just answer my specific questions? I am sure, with your vast knowledge and experience, it would have taken less time than your mindless rant against me. You could have even handed it over to a BYU professor or another of your minions to draft a reply. You need only have taken the time to sign (even that could have been done by a signature machine or, in fact an email response could have been sent under your name without you even seeing it). That would have saved you time and the so called pain I have inflicted upon you. Get over it, If I have caused you pain by reminding you the church is not true, that is not my fault. The cause of your pain lies with you and the church.

As an apostle where is your ‘Christlike’ love? You have opportunity of going after the ‘lost sheep’ yet you choose to criticise and say “I don’t care what you do”. How Christian of you. In your BBC interview you offered to sit down with a group of ex-mormons to discuss their issues. Yet, when someone wrote to you and offered for a group to come and meet with you at any time and venue convenient for yourself, you did not reply. If you had replied appropriately to my letter thousands of ex-mormons may have been reclaimed by the church. Instead, you have proven to them most conclusively that the church is not true and you must be aware of that or you would not be feeling the pain. Some have observed you as having a ‘meltdown’. I now understand why they should come to such an observation.

Of course, another explanation could be you are not in ‘meltdown’ but this is a very clever ploy by you to get the truth out without actually saying it. It’s like a ‘hidden parable’ that only those with ears to hear can hear. Perhaps your response to me could be translated “Tom, you are absolutely right, the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction. However, I cannot say that because of sworn allegiance to my ‘Brethren’ and all that I will lose. I have never seen Christ yet I always thought an apostle would. My ranting, crying, pounding the podium, prevarication with journalists etc. is my way of getting the message out subliminally. Of course, it’s false but I cannot state that”.

Now, to respond to your email. You asked me three specific questions and, although I have no obligation to reply because none of those questions have anything to do with claims I have made in public, I will respond. Unlike you, of whom I have asked specific questions pertaining to your published statements which you refuse to answer. Quotes from your email are in a different font to my reply or comments thereon.

"Tom, I love you but you absolutely break my heart. I have seldom met anyone during my years in England—unless it was your son Alan—in whom I saw greater potential. ......... You have a remarkable family. And that, of course, only adds to the immense pain I feel."
Why do you feel pain and how have I caused that pain? I wrote respectfully to you and asked questions based on factual information. Why should that cause you pain?

..................

" Oh, my! Tom, I weep over you and where you now find yourself. Don’t you realize that I have been reading stuff like you sent since I was 25 years old? But, I am sad to say, never in all those years with such disappointment."
Firstly some of the “stuff” I sent you was not available when you were 25 years old e.g. DNA studies confirming origins of American Indians, Book of Abraham papyri ( 1967 I believe) etc. Also, if you figured out the answers when you were 25 (you are now 70+) it should be easy for you to answer my questions, if there were any credible answers. So, why weep over me? If I am wrong in my facts or conclusions, show me in a loving way. Don’t refuse to address the issues and scold me for causing you pain. I suggest your pain comes from a lifetime of trying to be a valiant defender of that which indefensible.

"Tom, the Book of Mormon is true. It was delivered by and translated through the gift and power of God."
All I asked was how such a book, being the word of God, could contain so many falsities which you refuse to answer.

"Alongside this statement you can post on the bulletin board my General Conference talk on the subject. Now, may I ask you just a few questions?"
Yes, I will reply even though you refuse to reply to my questions.

"(1) Have you ever had a spiritual experience in your entire life? "
You know perfectly well I have had thousands of so called spiritual experiences. In my opinion they are equal to any of those that Joseph Smith had.

"Are you having any in recent days, or weeks, or months?"
Every day of my life (perhaps even every waking hour) I experience joy in the wonders and beauty of this planet and those people I love. By the way, weeping during a public address is not a “spiritual experience” it is an emotional experience

"No discussion of the Book of Mormon or the Church or the Gospel of Jesus Christ has any ultimate meaning at all without that experience."
Logical fallacy Dr. Holland? As well as being untrue.

"(2) How does your family feel about your views?"
What views? I have merely stated factual information from either church or school sources. They are not my views but those of so called prophets, seers and revelators and academic experts in specific disciplines. My family’s response is exactly the same as yours. They refuse to answer or discuss the issues and hurl personal insults against me. My ‘sweet angel’ of a wife, as you call her, has repeatedly said it would have been better for her if I had died while a faithful member of the church rather than live to ‘lose my faith’. My son Alan is the only one who eventually made known his ’views’ regarding some of my statements. He agreed there were errors in the Book of Mormon such as the doctrine that there was no death on this planet prior to 6,000 years ago; that Joseph Smith was wrong (i.e. not commanded by God) to have more than one wife; that the church is wrong to campaign against same sex marriage (this was during the California proposition 8 fiasco); however, he still believes Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus Christ in a grove of trees! Alan. As you know, is a stake president and has views (the first 3 of the 4 I mentioned) that are in direct opposition to the church. Of course, from the pulpit he will toe the party line.

"Are those views helping them?"
My views, if I were permitted to explain them, would help my family considerably and stop grandchildren being brainwashed into believing something which “you know ain’t so” in the words of Samuel Clemens / Mark Twain with whom you are familiar through your post graduate work. My views would help them be more compassionate of others, less judgemental and use their time to genuinely help others instead of promoting the aims of a church based on a fictional book. By contrast, by following and adopting the views of your church they ought to be (but fortunately are not) racist, homophobic, misogynistic, hate the Catholic Church (whore of the Earth per Book of Mormon), hate Protestant churches ((the Lord told Joseph Smith their creeds were an abomination to Him per JS History), anti Semitic (Mormons teach that the inhabitants of this earth and particularly the Jews are the only people who would have killed the Son of God). I could specify many other groups the church is intolerant toward despite your protestations to the contrary. Even in my own case your views are nasty and intolerant. According to church literature if someone like me who, as you know, has received the Second Anointing (made my exaltation basically unconditional) ,denies the Holy Ghost (interpreted as denying the church is true) they will be sons of perdition, cast out into outer darkness with Satan and his followers. Whereas, a man such as Adolf Hitler can inherit the Telestial Kingdom, still a kingdom of glory. So a man who kills 6 million Jews and countless others gets a better reward in the next life than I do according to Mormon theology (if there is such a thing). Does that sound like a just, loving God to you? No wonder there is shunning in the Mormon Church.

"Are people happier, prospering more, doing better following your lead?"
Yes, those that do are much happier and grateful to me for whatever small measure of help I have been to them. If you are referring to my family, however, well I have already told you that they have refused to take my lead in trying to establish what is true. Truth obviously means nothing to a true, devout Mormon!

"(3) Who are you trying to convince? Surely not me. Is it yourself or others?"
I am not trying to convince anyone. I merely wrote to you outlining specific information which appeared to contradict your claim/declaration that the Book of Mormon is true. You have chosen not to answer any of those evidences and resort to a personal attack on me. Who are you trying to convince? It would be easy to convince me if you had credible answers, but you don’t. Are you content with convincing gullible church members who dote on your every word? Or, are you trying to convince yourself Jeff? Methinks this may be the case and would certainly explain your outbursts.

"You can do what you want about the Church, so do it. Stay. Leave. Hide. Run. Burn the Book of Mormon. Bury your temple covenants. Do anything you want. As the very book you reject says—truthfully—“you are free to act, and not be acted upon.”

"Tom, my heart is broken as I write this. I wish I hadn’t begun."
Why is your heart broken? If it is out of concern for me why not lovingly and kindly correct my misconceptions if there are any? If it is because I have challenged your beliefs, you need to examine them. If they are based on truth you will be able to explain that to me as I am not a “dodo”. Why do you wish you hadn’t begun? Do I not deserve a reply? Of course, you haven’t even replied to the issues in my letter merely attacked me and ranted.

"I was raised without the Gospel in my youth and now I have it, so I am manifestly the wrong man to talk to about whether to go or whether to stay, whether the Book of Mormon is true or whether it isn't."
But you are wrong. You are exactly the right man for this task. You are the one who has spoken on television, written books and articles and declared solemnly to the world that you KNOW the Book of Mormon is true. Also, from an academic point of view did you not gain a master’s degree for a dissertation on changes to the Book of Mormon? Weren’t your Yale master’s and doctorate degrees on American Studies? Are you not, as an Apostle, a special witness of Jesus Christ? You are the very man to give me credible answers. You must know the truth so why don’t you share it instead of resorting to emotion filled drivel?

I say to you, Jeff, put up or shut up. Answer the considerable and overwhelming evidence that the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction or, if you can’t, stop trying to convince people it is true.

"The Book of Mormon changed my life more dramatically that any book could change any young man of whom I know—before or since— This does not make it true."
Millions of young men have had their lives dramatically changed by reading the Qur’an, the writings of Confucius, of Marcus Aurelius, of Plato, Aristotle, “Harry Potter”, the writings of Karl Marx, the writings of Mao Zedong, also translated as Mao Tse-tung and thousands of other books.
I know a couple of Christian evangelists who were both alcoholics and had their lives transformed by the Bible. They now spend all their time spreading their Christian beliefs. They have been told by the Holy Ghost the Book of Mormon is not from God and Mormons are not Christian. They could claim the truthfulness of their beliefs by your same argument, a book changed their lives that no other book can (including the Book of Mormon).

"it was first and foremost the Book of Mormon that taught me that Jesus is the Christ and filled my soul with lightning." Again, I ask you how can a book so full of falsities teach you that? You should have addressed my issues but, obviously, you cannot I am also aware of very many people who claim their “soul has been filled with lightening” or similar experiences and they have never read the Book of Mormon or have discarded it as false.

Consider this, by your own assertions if the Book of Mormon is not true then the Church is not true. However, if the Book of Mormon is true, it does not follow that your church is true. There is the Community of Christ and 50 or more “Mormon” churches who claim the divinity of the Book of Mormon and that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. In fact, those others appear to follow more closely the teachings of the Book of Mormon and those of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and John Taylor. So which would be the true Mormon Church if the Book of Mormon were shown to be true? Those who say Joseph Smith went astray in his polygamy (The Community of Christ) or those who maintain Wilford Woodruff went astray in trying to stop polygamy (the FLDS etc.). Indeed, it would appear that Warren Jeffs is more of a prophet like Joseph Smith than Thomas S. Monson is.

"So do what you want, Tom, but don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses. The discussion about the power and promise of the Book of Mormon went light years beyond that a long time ago."
Again you amaze me with such a statement. When and how precisely did this go “light years beyond science and history”. Jeff, you are either deliberately holding back information vital for mankind to understand the true nature of this planet and the universe or you are blowing smoke in the air. Which is it? Do you have knowledge our scientists would die for or are you mad?

"I love you and pray God you will be open to some spiritual indication of what is at stake here."
I see no evidence in your email nor in your works that you love me. You have refused to help and tried to blame me for some mysterious pain you feel, and you deride me. Which god will you pray to? The one depicted in a facsimile in the Book of Abraham who Joseph Smith said was God sitting on His throne. The figure has an erect penis which is rather a disturbing image of someone you pray to. It is, of course, quite normal if you understand the truth about the image, that it is a fictitious Egyptian fertility god. Don’t bother Jeff, I desire no supplication to such a being.

"I do love you and I will pray through this very night for you, more so than I will for the man who has cancer whom I now leave to bless. Yours is the more serious circumstance."
How offensive! You are saying I am in a worse condition than a man dying of cancer. Have you gone completely mad? How can you say, let alone think, such a thing? I am so sorry for that man, for anyone suffering a terminal illness, particularly a painful one. I have witnessed many friends and family going through such agony. How cruel and offensive of you to say such a thing!. I am in remarkably good health and associate with friends who love me. I consider myself very blessed or fortunate and would hate to have any illness let alone a terminal one which, I understand, could happen to any of us. How awful of you, I cannot believe you capable of such a thought. You certainly are not the man I considered you to be and, in no way, do you demonstrate the compassion you profess that Jesus Christ taught.

"With immense sorrow but unfailing love,

Jeff"

Your sorrow is self inflicted. I have done nothing except tell the truth. That should not cause you sorrow. The truth should not be your enemy. As for your unfailing love – where is it? You have failed to give me a response, to justify your extraordinary claims and have tried to belittle me with your ravings. How is that ‘unfailing love’?

Jeff, please do not reply to this email unless you have anything of true substance to say. You will be wasting time for both of us. As i said earlier, either put up or shut up. I would like you to be man enough to substantiate that which you claim to be true or stop being a part of the brainwashing of innocent children such as my grandchildren.

Sorry, but unless you are man enough to do this I have lost all respect for you. If I can ever help you to seek truth and understanding I am willing to take whatever time you require,

I mean this in all sincerity,
Tom

Brother Of Jerry
Bob McCue sent a similar letter to Holland roughly 10 years ago, and got a very similar reply.
He sent back a rely to the reply. It was more gentle than AO's reply, but not much, and, being Bob, it was considerably longer (23 pages iirc). He did chide Holland for not addressing ANY of the issues he brought up in his first communication.

Holland did not respond to the second letter. I doubt he will respond to AO's second email either. He already had the guilt cranked up to "11", so he has nothing more to fire back.

Lethbridge Reprobate
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Wow!

Makurosu
"don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses"
Yes, please. Keep yourself free of embarrassment by accepting the mopologist explanation of tapirs and wooden clubs with bits of obsidian embedded in them.

Your response is excellent. You called him on the carpet, didn't allow him to bully or guilt you, and held him to his claimed apostolic duty. His email (or the parts of it that you quoted) was shameful.

Surrender Dorothy
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
What a manipulative S.O.B. he is! Obviously he didn't learn his lesson after the interview with the BBC reporter about his outbursts making him look embarrassingly ignorant, immature, and dishonest.

I'm so sorry your family does not value your courage and integrity, but many of us do. You are my hero today.

helemon
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Wow! That it so condescending and emotionally manipulative. He knows they have nothing but guilt and emotion. Nice job standing up to him!
lillium
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
That was no surprise, just based on the BBC interview I saw. He dodged, lied, and generally seemed to be irritated and took offense at any question that might put TSCC in a bad light. And he did the emotional manipulation thing, pretending like the reporter was insinuating that he was dumb. Exactly what he did in his letter to you. Soooooo predictable. And immature.

tiptoes
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
dodo
dodo
dodo
dodo

Mia
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Mr. Hollands response says more about the church than I have ever heard any prophet or apostle admit. IMO, that was a confession to the untruthfulness of the mormon church. He validated everything i've studied and researched. It's the only time i've ever felt validated by the likes of them.

BeenThereDunnThatExMo
Hey Jeff...I Come From A Family That Has Been Generationally Traumatized With Familial Relationships Shredded & Torn Asunder By Mormonism & By Authoritarian Liars Such As U...
You lied on the BBC Documentary just as you lied on the pulpit at Gen-Conference recently and upon numerous previous occasions.

I can only hope that there is a "Hell" as there you will find yourself and the rest of your little "Boys Club" ilk sitting around your conference table figuring out ways to scam the rest of the S.O.B's that you find yourselves surrounded by.

Does your worn out integrity even notify you anymore when you begin to lie...or have you so abused it that you honestly can't even tell which parts of your life are authentic and which parts are fantasy???

You bastards have absolutley no idea of the damage, heartbreak and havoc you wreak daily in the lives of those gullible enough to look up to the likes of you as some sort of "authority figure".

LOL
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Mr Holland,
I am so grateful to be out of your clutches!

DNA
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Humans are great at partitioning their minds. He probably really thinks that he sent you a loving response that showed concern.

The side of people that does all the work that keeps all the plates spinning, makes whatever it takes to keep them spinning seem completely reasonable.

Was he actually a coward? Of course. Did he consciously think that is what he wrote? I doubt it.

Many will disagree with me. I’m surprised often here how many former TBM’s totally forget what it was like to inhabit the mind of a TBM.

This much I could pretty much guarantee. If any reasonable explanation existed at all that could answer questions such as yours, that only those in the highest positions have access to, he would have brought it out to help sway you.

His response should go a long way in showing that even the guys at the top have nothing at all that would convenience a thinking person that there is any merit to the church’s claims. If it existed, he would have used it in your case. It simply doesn’t exist.

davesnothere
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
When they’re left with no real response of value the powers-that-be fall back on their tried and true tools…fear and guilt….the trusty left and right hand of manipulation.

Gutsy and brave exchange there Anointed-One. Very clear who the man with real integrity is! Bravo, my friend.

Greyfort
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
It's amazing how much my view of the members of the Church Presidency have changed since I was a member. We were almost in awe of them. I guess they like the adoration. That's probably what they're working so hard to keep a hold of. They probably like the hero-worship they receive.

non-legal beagle anon for this
I'm not convinced that you're legally prohibited from publishing the contents of Holland's letter to you.
His response is now your personal property because Holland addressed it to you and sent it to you. It has now been received by you at your address to which Holland mailed it. By sending you his response letter to the letter that you first sent to him, I think Holland has essentially transferred its possession to you.

I think the Mormon cult is simply trying to intimidate you by attaching veiled "legaleeze" warnings to Holland's reply letter. I think Holland sent his response to you at his own risk. I wouldn't be bullied by him and the religious cult for which he works.

You might want to get some expert advice on this but I think you've got every legal right to reprint Holland's letter which he personally addressed and sent to you (i.e., knowingly transferred to your possession). It's yours. He gave it to you. I would therefore regard it as a gift to you from Holland that you can now do with as you see fit.

knowitsfalse
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
"My son Alan is the only one who eventually made known his ’views’ regarding some of my statements. ...that Joseph Smith was wrong (i.e. not commanded by God) to have more than one wife...."

So what your Son has just admitted (although he'll bury the thought and not admit it) is that the mormon church was founded by an adulterer and pedophile. That's what he's saying when he admits polygamy/polyandry wasn't of God. Worse, JS and many prophets to follow led the members of the church astray and into sin for multiple generations until the church was forced to give up polygamy. Does he see that that's what he's saying when he admits polygamy wasn't of God?

I also love that you mention the BoA facsimile with the mormon god on his throne with a massive erection. Talk about one little thing showing the insanity of the BoA.

PapaKen
The Witness will answer the question!
Judge PapaKen: "Inasmuch as this witness refuses to answer the questions, he is therefore held in contempt. I sentence him to think about the questions & return to the court with his answers. If he never does, he will be held in isolation from the truth for the rest of his mortal life.

"PapaKen Court is dismissed!" (gavel)

Lost Mystic
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Anointed One-

You are fantastic!

I have never read/heard/seen anyone rip an "apostle" a new one and hand their ass back to them!

Well done.

I'll bet he loses sleep over it...

anointed one
Thank you all for such kind and supportive responses......
.....Jeff Holland has no idea of the real pain we suffer when we find out our life's work has been for nought. When we realise we have been deceived and been an (unknowing) party to the deception of others.

How grateful I am for the support of this board. Jeff Holland may say he loves me but he shows the opposite. The irony is, this board, made up of exmos who may be Christian, Buddhist, New Age, Agnostic, Atheist etc. show me more love than a so called 'Apostle'.

Brian M
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Jeff Holland's tone of feeling pain and avoidance of answering questions directly are identical to a response I received in email from the man who was a mission president while I was in Denmark (I have an aversion to calling him "my mission president" or the time I was in Denmark as "my mission") He was a president at the UK MTC, when I received a reply from him.

It seems that general authorities have completely put all logical issues as extremely low priority for addressing and have been selected for the ability to do so. Because their sense of morality was awakened and developed through the metaphors of the Book of Mormon and while involved in the church organization they assume that all morality anywhere has its roots in these two things and that individual's and societies' well being are dependent on accepting them.

They are making an error of determining the cause for their attachment to their strong beliefs. Generally during teenage years to adulthood humans develop a model of morality through the metaphors of their environment and experience. By the time one is 25 these habits of thoughts are strong and require significant environment changes for them to be questionable.

It's interesting that Holland mentions specifically that since age 25 he has been able to ignore or disarm the logical problems of the church's claims. That may have been the time he decided to indefinitely value the church's intuitions over his own research and has followed that path ever since making them extremely strong ruts in his mental habits.

General authorities' mindsets seem to be mostly a product of their environment. Maybe the best way we ex-mos can help them to broaden is to have more polite, but open conversations with them like anointed one did.

I hope the group ex-mo conversation with Holland goes through.

Thanks for sharing anointed one. It confirmed to me that general authority morality and culture is largely a product of their environment that they were selected to enter for their personalities' need for authority and extreme social order.

peter
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Fantastic post. Loved it. By the way, the legal rambling at the beginning holds no merit - you are free to do whatever you want with your email. It's nothing more than canned legalese that, in many cases (including the company I work for), is automatically added to the end of an email. The "unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution" doesn't apply, as you are fully authorized to do whatever you want with your own email.

Please post his full response and don't allow the legalese to scare you!

Dances with Cureloms
Unless he signed an NDA he doesn't have to shut up about it.
I'm speaking as a man and not as a profit here.

Greyfort
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Yeah, my company has something like that at the bottom of our e-mails too. And most e-mails I receive from other companies also have it.

xyz
So.
Deputy Dawg Holland really is just a pathetic, jowly old fraud, pretending for the sake of his monthly cult salary that you, me, and everyone but him is deluded and foolish ...how sad, yet how predictable. He has only made himself look spectacularly ridiculous with his sanctimonious expressions of "sorrow" over the conditions of you and your family.

I'm sorry for you, anointed one, that you had to discover the shallowness and duplicity of someone you respected in such an unhappy fashion.

non-legal beagle anon for this
Sounds like a pre-emptive effort at muzzling the Mormon cult's critics. Talk about overplaying their hand.
Holland took the bait by replying in a letter exchange. What was he possibly thinking? Does he actually believe that what he writes to someone in personal correspondence must legally be kept under wraps by the recipient even if the receiver hasn't legally agreed to any such thing? Trying to keep it mum from the Mormon Church's end has the looks of a total non-starter to me. What a bunch of clunks. Typical of Control Freak Central.

safado53
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
First off, thanks for posting this annointed one...it just confirms what we all know about the leadership. He addressed nothing, and tried to put it all on you as if it were your fault....what a cowardly ass. Holland also wrote "So do what you want, Tom, but don’t embarrass yourself by asking about metallurgy or archeology or horses. The discussion about the power and promise of the Book of Mormon went light years beyond that a long time ago".....what the hell is he talking about? When did the discussion advance beyond this? These questions were never answered by the leadership and FAIR's attempts are weak at best, and there not even endorsed by the church, so again, when did we advance beyond the questions that you refuse to answer Jeff? The dishonesty and evasion in regard to the issues is sickening. It is so sad to see the men who are "prophets, seers, and revelators" provide nothing of substance to the world.

seeking peace
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
There is a reprehensible video going viral on the internet of a Baptist preacher suggesting that all gay people should be rounded up and put in a concentration camp. When I read Holland's calloused disregard for those who are truly seeking and trying with every fiber of their being to keep their families intact and protect their children from the cult, I see that the two are cut from the same narcissistic cloth. Holland, Mr. Baptist Preacher Man, and countless corrupt Popes all acting in the "Name of Christ," history continues to repeat itself over and over! Thank you for your courage Anointed One--at least the truth has set you free!

Zip
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Holland keeps going back to the idea of having spiritual feelings as confirmation of the truth. It is a matter of depending on feelings -- or depending on FACTS.

This is from another post today on the same subject:

_____________________________________________________________

Christ himself (whom the Mormons claim to follow) warned against trusting those "feelings" you mention. Nevertheless, Mormons reverse the very process that Christ sternly states.

According to Mormonism "Feelings are more reliable then facts". That's what we learn in the LDS church from our earliest years -- BUT -- it's exactly the OPPOSITE of what Christ himself taught in Matthew (and, interestingly, in the same verses in The Book of Mormon itself)!

The great issues is whether Joseph Smith was a TRUE prophet -- or a FALSE prophet.

Christ said that False Prophets would come and he then gave clear instruction regarding their discernment: He said that False Prophets will have all the appearances of lambs, but underneath they will be wolves.

He then said to judge them ONLY by their FRUITS. He gave no other advise.

In other words: DON'T trust appearances and DON'T trust the lamb-like feelings you get inside (the so-called "burning in the bosom")!

Con men never look like con men; If they did they'd be out of business overnight. A con man is someone you will naturally love like a brother. That's exactly how they get away with everything they do. Expect to be emotionally confused.

When it comes to these fully lovable "Prophets" forget your feelings! Instead, use your God-given intellect and ANALYZE WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO!

That is the ONLY advice Christ ever gave on the subject of False Prophets. If He had better advice he would have given that advice instead.

According to Christ's own (and only) instruction, When it comes to False Prophets, trust your mind not your heart! The very fact that Mormonism gives the exact opposite instruction should settle the matter. By their "fruits" the church leadership expose themselves. Their instructions contradict the very Christ they claim to follow.

As for Joseph Smith's ACTIONS (and those of many others), they were clearly reprehensible.

Even if you don't believe in Christ, the point is that Mormons DO -- and by their OWN spiritual foundation they fail.

When it comes to discerning True Prophets from False prophets Christ gave only one instruction: Never trust FEELINGS -- only trust FACTS!

myselfagain
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
You were very open to share his response with us. I am in awe of your intelligent answers and retorts to Mr. Holland's pompous, sanctimonious letter to you. 'HIS' heart is broken? What about all the poor souls that his church has hurt, families in crisis, people who feel lower than the lowest; ones whose lives have been changed for the worse by that church? It's HIS salvation he needs to be worried about- not yours or anyone else's.

anonfornow
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
I second (or third, fourth, fifth!) thanks and admiration for your bravery and integrity, AO! May all of your family come around to the truth you share so they can get on with their lives with peace and happiness. Your words are deeply appreciated and I send you my best wishes and thoughts. Thank you again, sir, you inspire more than those sad old men in SLC could ever dream to do.

fallible
Very well said. Thank you for sharing this exchange.

DebbiePA
Re: Reply from Elder Holland to my letter
Boo hoo for his broken heart. I say let's send him some of the hundreds of stories from RfM where spouses were abandoned, people lost their jobs, children disowned their parents, young gay men took their own lives, and parents wept because their child was lured by a sweetheart into a church that banned them from attending that child's wedding. And that's just the tip of the iceberg...all because of the oh so "family centered" LDS church.

MY heart breaks for those people, not for this fake apostle who has no clue that true sorrow is being heaped upon countless poor souls whose only fault is not believing the Mormon church is true.

Mia
Re: Sounds like a pre-emptive effort at muzzling the Mormon cult's critics. Talk about overplaying their hand.
They are used to compliance and adoration. They are used to say ing "jump" and people asking how high.

They are not acquainted with opposition. They think they have everyone convinced they are a son of perdition if they oppose of even question these men.

They don't have a clue how to answer sincere questions. That's why they made people stop asking them.